What’s needed to reshuffle the Middle East deck amid Israel-Hamas war
There are moments in history when existing paradigms collapse, and great change becomes possible. Such moments gave us the end of colonialism, slavery, empires, and communism. Often they follow great calamities, like the one we are currently enduring in the Middle East.
Many thought it self-evident that the two-state solution is the only way forward on Palestine. They believed that Israel cannot absorb millions of Arabs – and in the currently problematic notion that the Palestinians can responsibly govern themselves. After the massacre of 1,400 Israelis by Hamas militants from Gaza, even a moderate future Israeli government will balk at a total handover of the West Bank to the Palestinians — putting the next potential swarm of marauders on the outskirts of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
The question, then, is what to do instead, since everything tried so far has failed: The total Arab rejection of the early years; Palestinian uprisings; the starry-eyed Oslo peace process; unilateral pullouts; boycotts and blockades. It is a litany of failure that brought us to this point.
And instead of new thinking, we get the ossified routine: That Israel must invade Gaza (despite the mass casualties that will result and the absence of a day-after plan), that peace with Saudi Arabia must now be put on hold (even though Riyadh’s rulers still desire it); and that the criminals of Hezbollah might drag poor Lebanon again into the fray, supported with impunity by Iran.
I’d like to propose an alternative approach.
Saudi Arabia
Rather than handing Hamas and Iran a win, the Saudis should fast-track peace with Israel and drag Kuwait along with them. Israel needs this prize to delay sending troops into Gaza, or to keep any operation short, and instead focus on its hostage crisis. Saudi Arabia would get its security umbrella from the US, and a say in what happens next in Palestine, which they have always wanted. All sides would prosper. The only real holdouts to regional peace would be an array of failed states — Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Libya (the latter two may be suggestible).
War on Terror
There can be zero tolerance for Hamas and Hezbollah. The US and the EU should make any connection with, funding of or sanctuary for these groups heavily illegal. That begins with Qatar, which operates as a base and a bank for Hamas, yet also hosted the World Cup and wants a seat at the table of civilized nations. As for Iran, the sanctions should return — Pres. Biden! — with redoubled force and EU participation until Tehran leaves Lebanon and Palestine alone.
International rescue plan for Gaza
Gaza has always been a major thorn in the world’s side — no time more so than today. And an Israeli invasion will result in thousands more martyrs and refugees, along with a replenished stock of terrorists — a massive gift for Iran. The global community should commit $500 billion to a rebuilding fund — conditioned on the removal of Hamas. In its place will rise a rejuvenated version of the Palestinian Authority in the long term, some form of international protectorate — perhaps an Arab force — in the short term.
The situation is hugely complex, but the key is creating maximal pressure on Hamas, along with isolation. One alternative might be for Israel and Egypt to further tighten their blockade while allowing out those who wish to leave for the West Bank, with generous assistance along the way. If Hamas forces everyone to stay, that would create even further dissent and pressure on the group inside the strip. Despotic rulers eventually are toppled. The civil war that will break out in Gaza will be one of the most useful in history.
The Jordanian option
By turning Israel into a binational and not-so-democratic state, Israel’s West Bank settlements have hurt both sides. That said, the Palestinians cannot be trusted at present to rule the territory fully; some version of Hamas could very well take over, primed and ready to make trouble. Neighboring Jordan doesn’t want more Palestinians but sufficiently incentivized it might reconsider receiving control over parts of the West Bank as an interim solution. This might also nudge the region toward understanding that there is nothing necessarily sacrosanct about the 1967 borders that define the West Bank and Gaza — they’re just the random cease-fire lines of 1949. It’s a big ask, but Jordan’s economy is hurting hard and even kingdoms can always name their price.
Internationalization of the Old City
Suleiman the Magnificent did everyone a favor in building the stone walls around the Old City of Jerusalem. It is ready-made for Vaticanization. The Palestinians have demanded a partition of the entire city of Jerusalem, which given the history of conflict would require an impenetrable new border snaking through a dense urban landscape. Instead, Israel should consider loosening sovereignty over the walled Old City only, with a new administration involving interested Muslim parties such as existing allies such as Morocco and Jordan as well as . . . Saudi Arabia. Israel would handle security. Just as the Vatican is not formally part of Italy but is realistically still in Rome, so would the Old City not formally be in Israel but realistically still be in Jerusalem. Religious Israelis would need to get over themselves and accept an elegant solution to a combustible dilemma.
None of these ideas would be popular at first, and each invites ridicule from the purveyors of conventional wisdom and inside-the-box thinking. But together they would reshuffle the deck of the benighted Middle East. Never has the need for reshuffling been greater.
Dan Perry is the former Associated Press regional editor for Europe, Africa and the Middle East and the author of two books about Israel.
